Seventeen Questions …07

 

(2) Unscheduled divine sermon- By quoting reference of Jayadhavala it has been shown that the divine sermon of Tirthankara happens even at akaal (unscheduled time). However in Jayadhavala it is described as other kaals and not akaal. There is a difference. Here the times of divine sermons have been described which are their own swa-kaal and not akaal.

The one who is treated as Upadan, its every manifestation occurs at its own kaal. In the  same way, the one who is treated as Nimitta, that  too is Upadan with respect to own deeds hence even its manifestation occurs at its own kaal. In this manner the nimitta upadan  are compatible to each other with respect to each deed and there is no controversy.

The same principle has been established in Jaydhavala quite well by enquiring why Indra had to wait for 66 days ? In the answer it is stated that without Kaal Labdhi (attainment of right time) it was not feasible. This  term kaal labdhi has been accepted everywhere for fulfilment of a task. All events are carried out upon attainment of kaal labdhi only. Such is the definite rule. Therefore deriving that the divine sermon of Tirthankara takes place even in akaal – such interpretation is not right.

(3) Unscheduled times of Nirjara and Salvation- If the times of nirjara and salvation are treated as unscheduled then nimitta-upadan cannot have proper relationship.

In Shlokavartik (p70) it is stated- In reality the destruction of Moha accompanied with attainment of kaal etc. is cause for generation of Keval Gyan and not (Moha) alone since it  appears like that.

Further- doubt- In the first samaya of Ksheen Kashaya (gunasthana) the Keval Gyan should be generated ?

Answer- It should not be said this way since the assisting cause of specific kaal is absent at that moment.

From these,  it can be known that upon attainment of swa-kaal of any event only that event gets generated and not at other times. Therefore just as Keval Gyan is produced at specific kaal  only, in the same way the Nirjara and salvation occur at specific kaal. This should be surmised.

4) Aniyat (un scheduled) guna-paryaya- Interpretation of Prakrit terms ‘Niyat’ and ‘Aniyat’ in Gatha 155 of Panchastikaya as being Niyat and Aniyat discarding their Prakrit meaning is incorrect. There the terms imply ‘engrossed in the nature’ and ‘engrossed in vibhava qualities and paryayas’ respectively since in this gatha ‘swa-samaya’ and para-samaya’ have been defined. Hence it is told that the one who engages in swa-samaya, he gets rid of karma bondage. Therefore it is incorrect  to derive the meaning that worldly jiva has both niyat and aniyat paryayas.

Gatha 155- In spite of being stationary in swabhava if the jiva is engaged in vibhava guna-paryayas then he is para-samaya. If he attains swa-samaya then he gets rid of karma bondage.

Commentary- With adoption of swa-samaya and renunciation of para-samaya the karmas gets destroyed. Here ‘ niyat charitra in jiva swabhava is moksha marga’- this has been shown. Worldly jiva, in spite of being niyat ( remaining in stationary form)  in gyan-darshan ( from aspect of Dravya), manifesting   in accordance with the fruition of eternal mohaniya,  when he manifests in ashuddha upayoga, then by adopting several bhavas pertaining to world form, he gets to be having aniyat guna paryaya which is nothing but para-samaya. When the same jiva abandoning the manifestation pertaining to fruition of eternal mohaniya, he gets to be having Shuddha upayoga then he attains niyat guna-paryaya which is swa-samaya.

When the jiva abandoning para-samaya adopts swa-samaya, then surely he gets rid of karma bondage. Hence it establishes that the niyat charitra within jiva swabhava is Moksha Marg.

(5) sequential-non sequential manifestation: From Jayadhavala (1/289) rival group has derived this conclusion that ‘ the destruction  of Prag bhava ( non existence of present paryaya  in past paryaya) is dependent upon Dravya, kshetra, kaal. So long as Dravya, kshetra, kaal are not favourable, till then the prag bhava does not get destroyed. All the events do not have a scheduled moment hence the event occurs sequentially as well as non-sequentially.’

Here we have to analyse whether this meaning is correct.

The actual words are – The destruction of Prag Bhava also occurs from aspects of  Dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhav ( birth).

Here Prag Bhava and Upadan both have the same meaning.  Here only this is stated that the destruction of Prag Bhava occurs from aspects of drvya, kshetra, kaal and bhav. Here this has not been told that if the Dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhav are not favourable then the deed is not carried out. Hence deriving the concurrence of sequential, non sequential manifestations is not right.

Therefore with Upadan belonging to Nishchaya side and Nimitta belonging to Vyavahara side, it should be accepted that in conjunction of both, the deed is carried out. Siddhant is that with availability of Nishchaya Upadan, the paryaya of other Dravya which is nimitta  for the deed at that moment, it is Nishchaya Upadan also at the same time for its own manifestation, hence with the right mating of Nishchaya and Vyavahara  at every samaya every deed occurs at its own kaal  only. This should be the conclusion.

(6) Aniyat paryaya of Dravya karma- For generation of a deed, Upadan and Nimitta, these  two are mentioned as reasons; it does not mean that if Upadan is present and Nimitta is absent then the deed would not be carried out- deriving such meaning is incorrect. The authors of scriptures have told that Upadan is existent in internal pervasive form and Nimitta is present in external pervasive form therefore pervasiveness of both is present together at every samaya. In every samaya, every Dravya has been carrying out its own deed of the form of Utpad-Vyaya (generation-destruction). Otherwise the manifestation of Dravya at every samaya is not possible and nor can an odd pervasiveness criterion be laid down for upadan and nimitta.

In this way upon consideration from aspects of nimitta-upadan it is appropriate to conclude that all deeds are generated in sequential order only. The destined deed is performed according to the Upadan and at the same time the assistance of nimittas is also present for the deed.

(7) Nimitta-Upadan causes – The deed of Upadan and nimitta have joint pervasiveness. Therefore writing that whenever  suitable nimittas are available for the deed then accordingly the deed is performed- it is incorrect logic. This is because every substance being Upadan is carrying out its own deed. If the arrangement for the deed were dependent upon nimitta, then the Dravya cannot have utpad-vyaya-dhrovya (generation-destruction-permanence) nature as mentioned in scriptures.

When nature of Dravya is to manifest at every samaya then it cannot be said that in the absence of suitable nimitta the deed was not carried out. This may be true that the job did not happen as was desired. But no substance has taken a contract to manifest in accordance with someone else’s wishes.

Every substance carries out its own task itself, nimitta does not perform its task. However, with the favourability of nimitta applicable for the task and absence of unfavourable nimitta only, the task is carried out.

Therefore just as it has been established in Agam praman that every deed happens at its own time, this principle should be accepted.

Pandit Banarasidas- Nature of substance, fruition of past (Nimita), Nishchaya Upadan, effort (purushartha) and kaal- these are the five reasons with whose samavaya (assemblage) the deed gets performed. Taking  sides with any of them is Mithyatva and accepting that in the presence of all, the deed gets carried out is Moksha Marg.

 In Gommatsar also kaal, Ishwara (nimitta), soul, nityati ( destiny), and swabhava(nature) these five ekants  have been informed for the same reason as above. Therefore where ekant Niyati has been disapproved, there Samyak Niyati has been accepted. Thus the deed of every Dravya is carried out from aspect of these five  samavaya (assemblage) in sequential order and not non sequential order.

In the end we present again the commentary  by Acharya Shubhchanda on Gatha 321-323 of Kartikeya Anupreksha:

Jinendra is aware of the birth, death, happiness-unhappiness, loss-profit, etc. of the jiva in whichever country, city, village or forest etc. ordained by whichever weapon, poison, fire, water, diseases in whichever period of time, in the same way, means and time. No one has the capability to avoid it including Jinendra, kings etc.

That Bhavya soul is pure Samyak Drishti devoid of three foolishness, 25 impurities who believes, knows and experiences in the above described way the artha  paryayas of jiva, pudgala etc. six dravyas inclusive of generation-destruction and nara-narak etc. vyanajan paryayas in the same way. He is Samyak drishti.

Contrary to this the jiva who doubts the words of jinendra and deva-guru-dharma and tattvas, he is Mithya Drishti. This is clear.

Counter Question 3: You are saying that the time of generation of each paryaya of every Dravya is definite. Here we would examine this belief of yours.

We also accept that every deed is produced at the same time at which the event of its generation is reflected in the knowledge of omniscient. However the production of that deed does not occur because it is being so reflected in the knowledge of omniscient, since merely knowing the state of the thing alone is the task of Keval Gyan but the accomplishment of that deed is not the job of keval gyan.

Gatha 321-323 also intimate the same thing that in spite of the deed happening at the time it is known in the Keval gyan, it is accomplished by means of its predefined reasons only. Pandit Phoolchand ji also has written that establishment of KramBaddha paryayas should be carried out keeping in mind the cause-effect tradition only. In other words the knowledge of Keval Gyani is not cause for production of the event. The deed is generated at its own time, due to its own predefined reasons only and not otherwise.

The meaning of Bhavitavyata (destiny) is the self established capability in the substance of accomplishment of the task. The internal means implies the previous paryaya form Upadan capability and the external means implies nimitta cause.

In this way there are two opinions under consideration-

1) The time at which the event takes place due to its predefined reasons, that only should be accepted to be the prime reason for the event.

2) Whenever the event takes place, it occurs due to its predefined reasons only and at time when it occurs is  called its swa-kaal (own time). Therefore both the internal and external reasons of the event should be accepted as the prime reasons for the event.

Here your principle gives prominence to the time of the event as the prime reason. Our Siddhant does not give primacy to the time in the generation of event but gives primacy to the internal means (Upadan) and external means (nimitta). Therefore though the event occurs due to its predefined reasons only but the time at which it is accomplished gets called as its own time of fulfilment.

The question arises that your philosophy is unable to answer the all the issues faced by the shruta gyani jivas. Every jiva is facing this question that the paryaya in which he is at present, why it is so? Why is he being happy? Why is he being unhappy? Why does he adopt different extraordinary paryayas? In one paryaya if he is a king then in some other paryaya why is he  a pauper? Why does he go to heaven or hell? Why are you engaged in promotion of your Siddhant or viewpoint ? etc. etc.

Is this only the solution that it was so reflected in the knowledge of the omniscient? The Siddhant that you have accepted, in accordance with that you should remain as only knower and seer and that too not by mind or brain or senses since they are dependent upon others . So long as you do not become knower seer alone, till then you cannot be immersed in inactivity. Then it cannot be described as anything other that Niyativad form Mithyatva in accordance with karma kand etc. agam scriptures.

If you say that the one accepting Gatha 323 alone is pure Samyak Drishti then in reply we have to say this much only- In Agam granths of Jain Sanskriti the generation of event has been described in two ways for the Shruta Gyani jivas – one is from aspect of belief with respect to the subject of Keval Gyan and the second aspect is with respect to duty as subject of Shruta Gyan.

Why has this analysis been carried out for the shruta gyani jivas ? The reason is that the shruta gyani jivas are existing in completely different state as against Keval Gyani jivas. Whereas the keval gyani jivas do not need to do any more, on the other hand the shruta gyani jiva is always facing the issue of carrying out deeds. Whereas the Keval Gyani jiva is remaining knower and seer of the activities happening at every moment , the shruta gyani jiva has to be busy in adjusting things under present conditions in accordance with experience. Hence shruta gyani does not have any other solution than adopting cause-effect methodology for generation of deeds.

In this way if considered from aspect of shruta gyan then every event, being swa-pratyaya and swa-para-pratyaya, is being accomplished accordingly by only Upadan means or Upadan and nimitta means together. For them the subject of keval gyan is pertaining to faith alone .  Hence for them the cause-effect methodology has been advised to be adopted. If someone tries to abolish the cause-effect methodology for generation of deed, then he would become Niyatvadi, Ekant Mithya Drishti only.

If based upon the faith alone the shruta gyani jiva becomes astray being devoid of purushartha and thankfulness  then due to effect of this Mithyatva what else can happen other than transmigration in this infinite world ?

In this way from aspect of shruta gyan some paryayas of every substance are in sequential order and some are in non sequential order also.

If considered from aspect of Praman then both the Keval Gyan and Shruta Gyan are Praman (true) only. Hence based upon the cause-effect relationship, the known sequential order and non sequential order of paryayas by means of shruta gyan is true only.

In this way the things happen as they are known by Keval Gyani as a rule. The shruta gyani also considers it essential that without knowing the cause-effect relationship and without making necessary purushartha the deed would not be accomplished.

However, without doing so, if some person believing the Niyativad to be the basis for generation of event, becomes devoid of purushrtha then the deed would never be accomplished. If the deed has to be accomplished then purushartha is a must.

Definition of Niyativad as per Gommatsar- the thing which has to happen for someone, that happens at that moment in the same way.

Poor shrutagyani does  not know what has been reflected in the knowledge of kevalgyani! Hence whatever happens is in accordance with cause effect relationship from his viewpoint. Therefore at the second moment, that paryaya only gets produced for which the favourable external paraphernalia is available in all readiness.

Though manifestation of jiva is assured in the second moment after manifestation of previous paryaya in anger form, but out of anger, pride, deceit, greed which one shall manifest is dependent upon the suitable external events only.

You wish to declare the nimittas as irrelevant which is incorrect. Akalank Deva has said that- Without demolishing the incapability of Updan, if the  assisting cause remain irrelevant then how can it be called assisting cause?

That Upadan capability only manifests into event form for which the nimitta material is available incidentally or by means of manual effort. This statement of yours is absolutely wrong that when the Upadan is present for carrying out the deed, then nimitta material automatically becomes available.

Continued…..